Guns in fantasy

>>54466998
I like the way Chris Perkins handles firearms in his various streams that he DMs.

They're still bare minimum basic hand canons, and extremely uncommon, to the point that he'll describe it to the characters with things like

>"One of them points a strange metal wand at you and the end of it explodes. You don't know what it is, but you take (x) piercing damage."
>"The man has what appears to be a hilt tucked into his belt, but there's no blade."

>>54466998
They are just refluffed bows with zero mechanical difference.
No point to isolating the player for punishment nor derision nor pandering to his retardness.

File: hqdefault.jpg (24KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x360px

>>54467176
Isn't atmosphere as important as mechanics?

>>54467341
Not more than fun and fairness at giving out attention in the session.

People who dislike that are more than welcome to find another group they like more.

File: 1488147966910.jpg (69KB, 640x628px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 640x628px

upgraded crossbow with a very slow poison

more damage at the cost of:
>no stealth
>chance to miss
>more expensive

File: 1500445625078.jpg (59KB, 658x960px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 658x960px

>>54466998
Does contemporary fantasy count? Because if so then they're the main battle implement of just about everyone, but are matched pretty well by magic and skilled swordsmen, since the setting is pretty anime.

>>54467536
> since the setting is pretty anime.

Since when do superheroes count as anime when it's the setting for capeshit for a half a century?
Archers, shieldman and swordsmen pawn gunners all the time.

>>54467594
Well I mean, my setting is actually pretty anime. I took a lot of influence (for characters at least) from weebshit and it's in the 21st century, an average joe archer or swingy swordy type guys are going to get fucked up by the gun in most circumstances, though of course exceptions exist.

I never heard of hand cannons. A quick google was pretty interesting. Id been lookin for a way to do guns but without having literal guns, but still had ghe same imagery and iconography which kind of ruled out non guns. Hand cannons are bigger since I need something revolver sized but its actually a place to start design wise. Thanks a lot!

I dislike guns in fantasy. I just don't use them; gunpowder doesn't exist.

>>54467742
I'm curious what you mean by "Wanted to do guns without using guns" do you mean magically propelled projectiles similar to a firearm? or like very, very early firearms, because if you want a real life weapon comparable in size to a handgun, you'd need to go to the 1500s and use wheel lock pistols. Assuming things are going for a little bit of historical accuracy.

>>54467507
Crossbows don't have a chance to miss?

>>54467819
I think he means a greater chance to miss, since an unrifled firearm isn't going to be super accurate outside of about 30 meters.

>>54467819
greater chance to miss like this anon said
>>54467833

>>54467808
Tough to explain. I wanted a magicalnitem that couls shoot energy, but due yo the setting they cant be actually guns, even guns that shoot magic, due to creative limitations of the world Im building for. But theres so much iconography in the motions and movementsin using and even parts of a gun, like the revolving chamber or the hammer in a western setting.

>>54468116
Have you thought of a particular motion you'd like to emulate? A breech loading gun that uses big shells might be a nice look that you can fluff for pretty much any tech level you want, and it solves the issue of people wanting to turn everything into a minigun or a sniper rifle.

>>54468170
Mainly off the top of my head, arm outstretched with index finger ouy as if on a trigger, downlow to the side shooting position, also with the ability to be able hold hand open to your side in a sorta quickdraw pose.

>>54468242
So you want to emulate the romanticized wild west quick draw gun fighter. You're gonna have to explain the "creative limitations" here, because there's not much you can use to emulate that outside of having a magic gun so far.

>>54468422
Yeah its a tough nut to crack. The limitation is just a hardline stance on no guns. But like I said, never seen a hand cannon before and that feels really close to where I want to be, I just need to downsize it and take some creative liberties with how it seems like it should be held. Im willing to compromise on the mechanical aspects if I have to, even though I love the aesthetic of revolver chambers.

>>54468242
>>54468422
Just put a wand in a holster/on the hip? That's not too much of a stretch.

>>54468593
Like that anon said, just use a specialized wand which is designed to shoot a specific type of attack magic without chanting.

>>54468593
Handcannon is still a firearm anon, it's just a far earlier form. Literally a tube on a long stick that shoot bullets. Wands are the only thing you can reasonably use. No revolvers either because that's almost exclusively a firearms thing.

>>54466998
Guns in my setting are the preferred weapon of armies, but only an idiot would neglect the important role of melee troops. Because Magic is stupid, fickle, and temperamental; you can't enchant guns. Which means anyone with the ability to summon monsters (which is just about everyone who can twidle their fingers and speak gibberish) or the ability to create magical wards (just about everyone else who can cast) is going to walk right through a firing line of .50 cals to stab you in the face with a vorpal kitchen fork.

You can enchant bullets. Unfortunately you can enchant bullets exactly once, and it costs about as much as a Hellfire missile. So no one does. While not every army is made up on summoned monsters or angry wizards, they are enough of a problem that every nation, army, and podunk King has at least a small number of willing idiots with magic swords or spears or clubs to brain any dipshit with Greater Ward of Fuck You.

>>54466998
guns are fine. /tg/ has taught me that all gm's are turbo-autists however, who will screech and actively attempt to punish me for desiring one however

>>54466998
SoS has a pretty realistic take on firearms. The chief advantage is that they're easier to aim than bows because you don't have to hold the draw, so they can benefit more from aiming. They have shorter snap-firing range, but when combined with aim they (and crossbows for that matter) are more accurate overall than self bows.

Self bows have the advantage of being able to shoot repeatedly and being easier to shoot at a whim. The difference between crossbows and guns is primarily that crossbows reload faster, but have to be reloaded all at once because if you stop spanning them the string flicks back into place, whereas you could conceivably put the powder in the gun, then run somewhere, then put the ball in, then run somewhere else, then tamp it all down and prime it, then run somewhere else, then shoot it.

So there's a niche for all of them. When you're dealing with fuckos in heavy armor, nothing beats a gun, but if you're just shooting a bunch of lightly armored people you'd be better off with a bow because you could rapid shot a bunch of them.

Another thing that's kind of cool is that the game's setting acknowledges that people with cannons and guns would rekk monsters pretty easily, so most of the megafauna in the setting is already extinct, with the exception of underwater creatures which can't be easily shot.

>>54467176
Are you mentally retarded?

Guns are completely different from bows from their logistics, use, training, and manufacturing. If you don't realize how greatly that would impact a setting and differentiate mechanics you don't understand history at all.

>>54468978
People like you are why gun retards and guns are despised by every group with experiences with fags like you.

>>54467507
>no stealth
There is no such thing as a stealthy longbow or crossbow. Anybody who thinks they're "stealthy" is a fucking moron who has never actually fired one. They make a loud TWANG or CRACK, emphasized by the sound of them hitting their target. Which typically screams.

>>54468999
Doesn't change the fact that you know nothing John Snow.

Longbows
>Hard to produce, need special trees like yew to be cultivated, very expensive and time consuming to make. Soldiers need extensive training from youth to be able to fire high poundage bows and are very rare and require a "longbow culture" to sustain similar to the edict issued by Edward. Exists as a support weapon used in conjunction with heavy infantry. Fast rate of fire, good at suppressing the enemy and demoralizing them, bad at killing armored foes. Wrong arrow-heads will flat out fail to penetrate different types of armor and only cause bruising/minor fractures.


Handgonnes

>Cheap and easy to make en masse, expense comes from the production of the ammunition and 'fuel' which requires more advanced industry. Training troops to use is pathetically easy as anybody can master them, including women. Excellent penetration against most armor in short range, but suffers from inaccuracy, Has a rate of fire comparable to some crossbows, but better driller users should be able to fire off more shots than a windlass. Excellent at demoralizing the enemy but has a chance to explode in user's face and kill them.

>>54468999
Out of curiosity, why would you treat a firearm as a refluffed bow? There's a lot of differing factors if you start using the arquebus in your setting.

>>54468598
The position when held in the hand is not quite right and the quickdraw doesnt really work. Its tough to get it until you really imagine a wand with those kinds or actions. Its the easiest place to go but imagine a quickdraw to the side shot with a wand in contrast with a gun. Its admttedly very picky and particular but eh. I also dont feel wands fit the setting but if I had to Id use them.
>>54468797
Oh, see l, the thing is, stuff like fire works/pyrotechnics or cannons and even handheld crossbows that are basically hand guns anyway are actually fair game. Just nothing that evokes a modern gun.

>>54469121
TL;DR, Longbows are more expensive and RPG wise must require special strength and training skills to use if it's got enough poundage to really matter in terms of killing power. A gun however requires no strength, little training, and is much cheaper to buy (the gunpowder less so). However it has a chance to explode due to impurities in the barrel.

>>54469178
Then you can use literally anything you want, I recommend something like a wheel lock, which is a very outdated, complex and expensive design if someone thinks "This is like my Glock" they'd be fucking delusional.

File: musket.jpg (146KB, 750x1065px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 750x1065px

>>54466998
I prefer firearms being like a bow that pierces armor, does more damage, but takes much longer to load.

Alternatively, I like making the whole setting with firearms. There is a criminally low amount of fantasy settings set in the post-industrial/firearm age.

>>54469135
You have both brain damage and zero experience with real life tabletop experience with normal people if you don't know this simple thing in less than a minute.

>>54469264
>There is a criminally low amount of fantasy settings set in the post-industrial/firearm age.

There is a lot and its called modern superheroes settings.
Not interested.

File: 1500686759764.jpg (41KB, 448x635px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 448x635px

>>54469287
>ask a question to see you view like a reasonable human being
>immediately throw insults at me
Ah, you're only pretending to be retarded. I see.

File: magic.jpg (117KB, 752x1063px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 752x1063px

>>54469298
>modern superheroes settings
Come on, we both know that no one is talking about superheroes settings. We're talking about things like Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings, but with Napoleonic musket warfare or 5th generation tech and tactics.

>>54469354
>We're talking about things like Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings, but with Napoleonic musket warfare or 5th generation tech and tactics.
That's garbage.

Just say to your DM you want to have your cock and your guns sucked personally by him.

>>54469354
Well I mean, I brought up my contemporary fantasy setting. Earlier, either way contemporary fantasy and a superhero setting are leagues away from each other, they're nothing alike.

File: rifle.jpg (123KB, 752x1063px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 752x1063px

>>54469381
Are you telling me you wouldn't want to see Orcs and Men, lined up in formation, exchanging musket fire while cannon fire rains down on them, waiting for the inevitable order for a bayonet charge?

>>54469381
Did a /k/ommando touch you in a funny place or something anon? Gun seem to make you really mad for some reason.

File: 1397685130249.jpg (527KB, 576x806px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 576x806px

>>54469426

>>54469354
I think stuff like 7th Sea and Pirates of the Caribbean sort of does that, modern sea-themed myth and magic

File: 1481466247260.jpg (855KB, 3000x1705px) Image search: [Google]

855KB, 3000x1705px

>>54469450

File: Charge de cavalerie (autrichienne peut être) (fin du XVIIème siècle ap. J.-C.).jpg (457KB, 1319x900px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 1319x900px

>>54469483

File: luetzwoer_2.jpg (37KB, 480x274px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 480x274px

>>54469521

File: 1500433143575.jpg (124KB, 850x631px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 850x631px

>>54469426
I'm gonna have to say anon. I personally prefer modern warfare between an asymmetrical faction and a built up military innahellhole fighting out, with specialized combat casters and magic fucking with everyone in between flanking maneuvers and exchanges of MG fire. While both have to deal with deadly, fantastical creatures very much ready to eat the both of them.

>>54469595

So Shadowrun

>>54469696
I guess, but I hate the cyberpunk sci-fi setting and aesthetic.

>>54466998
Can someone explain to me why you would even want guns in a medieval setting?
It seems to just detract from the atmosphere. Why not play something napoleonic or later if your want guns and swords.

>>54469755
Well, guns have been around in medieval settings in real life. Plate armor for example as we know it actually came after firearms. It is period appropriate, it's just poorly implemented because firearms of the time don't make for good adventuring weapons unless you play with them to be that way.

>>54469755
>Why not play something napoleonic or later if your want guns and swords

Guns existed in Europe before plate armor did.

>>54469354
There is Familiar of Zero.
It's pretty much Three Musketeers' Europe + Magic (it even has a prequel/sidestory that is pretty much the Three Musketeers but D'artagnan is a tsudere, Aramis and Porthos are vampires and Athos has a bitchin monocle)

>>54469815
I am not saying it's not historic I just don't understand how proto cannons and hand cannons add anything to an adventure because of how slughish they were.
Like >>54469813
said. I am curious what people think they add to the setting beyond being historicaly accurate since they just seem like a very limited crossbow to me in mechanics.

>>54469893
Generally because it's a unique flavor, it gives the player the idea they're playing a musketeer or conquistador instead of "ranger" or "rogue with a bow". It only adds to the setting because it's a crossbow with different tradeoffs.

>>54469893

The only people who care about historical accuracy in a fantasy setting are trolls and uber faggots.

Perhaps some of use are just tired of the same old fantasy setting and want shit like guns and cannons and shit because why not, it's fucking fantasy you don't get to dictate how it should be.

>>54469893
Musketeers supporting guns on their bardiches, armored halberdiers holding the line, black riders wielding pistols and fuckhueg greatswords are cool as fuck. And that isn't to go into sideswords, sideswords are just plain pretty.

File: dragon-quest-dai-no-daiboken-357038.jpg (819KB, 1568x1552px) Image search: [Google]

819KB, 1568x1552px

>>54468116
Pic related?

>>54469755
It never bothered me. What really rocks my caravel is the portuguese Age of Discovery anyway, when guns were aplenty.

Besides, most settings don't really relate to medieval times beyond a thin coat of paint. Which might be the reason why guns makes so much difference for some, the whole thing depends a lot on aesthetics.

Also what >>54469953 and >>54470252 said.

I do it such that guns useful for one person are costly and mostly work for adventurers. But one hundred peasants with arquebus are enough of a threat to worry the PCs.

>>54470252
>>54470994
Thanks for the explanations. Totally forgot about stuff like black riders. And perhaps it is a thinner coat of paint then I thought then. I am more of a fan of low fantasy so I guess I just missed the point

File: steamworkshop_webupload_previewfile_174980647_preview.jpg (76KB, 349x778px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 349x778px

How common were hand cannons during the, say, 100 Years War and War of the Roses? They are late medieval, arent they?

>>54466998
>have the "flavor" of guns without taking one out of a medieval feel (like a rifle-looking musket/arquebus would)
I think an arquebus fits in just fine with the medieval feel. I don't see the conflict at all.

File: volley.jpg (443KB, 1200x1386px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1200x1386px

>>54471615
The particular example used in the OP is actually very good since its functionally a gun, but looks very distinct from one. It just looks like a staff. I think thats the appeal.

File: arquebus.jpg (19KB, 550x217px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 550x217px

>>54471799
I agree, but I still think an arquebus is distinct enough from more familiar muskets that it still fits in.

>>54471592
They weren't common at all in the Hundred Years War, but they showed up quite a bit in the War of the Roses. You could say that the proliferation of firearms exploded after the 1420's.

I did a Empire army for fantasy. It got me thinking about guns in a world with creatures like orcs.

Particularly how the empire troops were in Renaissance German clothing mostly cloth because as guns became more powerful armour became useless. However since they still fought melee focused tougher than human beasts it occurred that they should still be wearing armour.

So I made the army from war of the Roses and the old dogs of war miniatures (lots of sallet helmets and plate). I had visions of guys in full or partial plate firing from the front rank with ranks of pikes behind them, orcs charging madly into the blocks

>>54472807

Armor was not made obsolete until the late 17th to 18th century. You dont see many soldiers with lots of armor because armies and wars keep getting bigger and bigger to the point that equipping everyone with full protection was unfeasible.

>>54469135
Because nobody gives a shit and mechanics should be there to support the narrative and not otherwise

there's literally nothing stoppiing me from making guns reskinned bows if bows don't have the other implications they have, because nobody gives a shit

it's why axes and swords are basically the same in tabletop, because even though they're worlds appart games generally simplify them as one-handed bladed weapons for the sake of simplicity at the table

nobody gives a shit about how powerful guns are and how they could make different shit if it means having to go out of your way to modify the system in order to address things the rest of the game doesn't address for the other weapons, specially if it's a standardized, flat/dice damage system

if you want to have extra changes, make them narrative, not mechanic

Having been near handguns and late 15th century cannons firing, it's pretty scary to hear them fire for the first time. And they were on our side, too.

File: 021_1474087121.jpg (652KB, 1688x1200px) Image search: [Google]

652KB, 1688x1200px

>>54466998
Making equipment rules for setting... Have arquebus, musket (16-17th centuries) musket (18-19th centuries), grenade, pistol, grenade launcher, grenade launcher, rocket basket, repeating pistol, pneumatic pistol, pneumatic musket, repeating musket and flamethrower. Will also include stuff like swivel guns, canister shot, dynamite guns, petards, cannon.

Currently being autistic about how and where to abstract for a system where undead are useful as spaceship armor. I'm talking about D&D5 of course. I'm settling for three actions for reloading, two if character has a bandolier with paper cartridges. Plus options for rifling, double barrel, and any bronze gun weights half but costs double. I want to make viable that a charcater might use guns throughout the levels.

Wondering if I'll have fire lances... some kind of 2d6 fire one-shot plus some effect to abstract desorientation.

http://kissmanga.com/Manga/Otome-Sensou
Migh want to read this OP. Pic related. Warning: sometimes as pleasant as wooden splinters between the teeth.

Were pistols more expensive than two-handed firearms? Also did matchlock pistols exist or do you need wheelock?

Guns exist in my setting, but not on the planet the players started on.

>>54473233
I appreciate this so I can better visualize how these work.

>>54466998
>What's your take?
I Sony carr much either way. I have no notion about it no longer being fantasy if guns are involved, but I don't feel like a setting should have guns just because either.

I have never been as interested in Late Middle Ages/Renaissance as many other fantasy role-players seem to be either and have usually placed my own fantasy settings in a time period a fair bit earlier than that, which makes guns feel pretty anachronistic. The one I'm working on right now is probably best described as Iron Age fantasy.

>>54466998
>>54466120

>>54468836
See, what /tg/ taught *me* is that all players are selfish brats, who demand to be catered to at all times.
Neither of these are true, of course. They're just our perceptions because everyone here is too terrible a person to actually be allowed to play rpgs.

>>54469264
>I prefer firearms being like a bow that pierces armor
Are you familiar with the penetrating power of high end crossbows and long bows?

>>54473233
" A young girl named Sharka is raped and left for dead among the corpses of her whole town"

>>54475345
I'm also appreciating visualizing this.

File: DOOT.png (562KB, 632x738px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 632x738px

>>54469755
Allow me to direct your attention to >>54475713
If you'll just note the date it should become apparent why.
It's because guns and cannons existed alongside sword, pike and bows as common military weapons for hundreds of years.
Also because people like guns.

>>54469006
Poisoned hair pins are good.

If you can throw them I guess.